Do I use my older Tamron SP AF LD 28-105mm f2.8 lens on a D90 or D7000 or do I scrap it and get a newer Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 on a D5100?

I have an older Tamron SP AF LD 28-105mm f2.8 lens, which I've been using on my Nikon D70s to take pictures of my daughter at her gymnastics meets, where flash is not allowed. (In those lighting conditions, I'm only getting 1/125sec @ f2.8) I guess my wife is finally fed up of me mentioning that I'm only at iso 1600, so shes told me to get a new(er) camera. <grin>

So my options are . . .

1) Get a D90, use the older Tamron 28-105mm. Get a Nikon 55-200mm and try to use that to get longer shots and live with the motion blur. (Can't afford a 70-200mm f2.8)
2) Get a D7000, (same as above), but much more bells and whistles to play with. <grin>
3) Get a D5100, scrap the Tamron 28-105mm, get a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. Get a Nikon 55-200mm and try to . . .

I like the extra reach of the 28-105. It makes that lens almost a walk around lens for me.

But I guess I'm wondering . . .

Is the newer Tamron 28-75mm better / faster enough to give up the extra reach? And is it enough to make me give up getting the D7000 and get the D5100 in order to have enough to get the newer lens?

EDIT: Oh, yeah. The older Tamron doesn't have a built-in focus motor, so if I went with the D5100 I wouldn't be able to use it on the D5100 and get autofocus, which I'd need. (My eyes just can't see that well now-a-days. Maybe the Pentaprism in the D90/D7000 might help?)

None of the usual sites have measured the performance of the 28-105 AFAICS. However, user reviews are all uniformly positive on the lens, FWIW. If it were me, I would want the new Sony sensor, and I would be tempted to use the lack of a focusing motor to justify getting the D7000 with no new lens over getting the D5100 and having to buy a new lens.

The old site format was much better and you could see the data and charts on the same page. Now, it takes more steps to find the lens you're lookng for, and I don't even see the MTF charts for that lens anymore (even though the old site had them).

But, the listing for it still has the MTF data. It tested badly (and photodo.com only graded it at a 2.4 on a scale of 1 to 5 using their rating system that was based on the MTF tests). Scroll down on that photodo page and you'll see the MTF data. Unfortunately, it's only the weighted MTF Data, versus all of the data they had in the charts for it showing how it worked as you move away from center. I looked at it when I was lens shopping a few years back, and ruled it out since it tested softer than many f/2.8 zooms (even when stopped down at some focall lengths. So, I went with the older Tamron 35-105mm f/2.8 instead (which is as sharp wide open at f/2.8 compared to the 28-105mm f/2.8 stopped down to f/4 from what I could see from tests of both lenses). Of course, 35mm is not a very good starting focal length for a zoom used on a camera with an APS-C size sensor, depending on what you want to use it for. :-)

tclune -- Thanks for your input! I guess you can tell I'm really leaning towards that D7000. I went over the details with my wife and she says if the D7000 is the camera, its the camera.

JimC --

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimC

The 28-75mm should also test better compared to the 28-105mm.

Yeah. I was kinda getting this feeling. I'm going to have to do some research on a "next" lens. In the meantime I'm going to take my old Tamron to the local Best Buy and see if they'll let me put it on their D7000 and shoot some shots.

I know this is horribly late on this topic, but perhaps someone else will see it...
I've had the Tamron SP 28-105 2.8 AF for many years, and it HAS and continues to be my prime lens for Weddings and locations. The way in which it responds to a variety of lighting (including mixed flourescents) is great, and the reach is quite useful in low light. Yes, the motor is old-type and if you're not using the right focus program for your body, this lens can tend to "hunt around" on you. Otherwise, I love it. I've even used it for indoor Youth Basketball (ARC) and outdoor Track & Field (as a nice secondary to my prime 400 2.8L).

What's that they say? "Old lenses don't go bad, they just feel a lot heavier to cart around."

Also, if you NEED to get a lens, like in option 3, skip the Nikon 55-200 and strongly consider the new Tamron 70-300 (or the Nikon 70-300 VR) for that range. I curremtl have the 55-200 with the Tamron 17-50 and am strongly considering selling it for either of the 70-300's. A couple of advantages. First, both are much sharper @ 200, and full frame lens if later elect to upgrade to full frame.

I know this is horribly late on this topic, but perhaps someone else will see it...

Now, this is an old thread. I just happened to come across it in Google while researching what to put on my want list for my daughter's gymnastics season next year.

After going through this season with the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, and having had (and still have) the Tamron 28-105mm f2.8, I got to admit I miss the extra reach of the big lens. So much that I'm thinking my next body has to have a built-in focus motor. [What's the latest on the Nikon D7100 or the D400? <grin>]

Although some of the cheerleading competitions we went to, they had signs posted everywhere saying "No Telephoto Lenses". Not sure why, although I have some guesses. <grin> But having the tiny Nikon D5100 and tiny Tamron 28-75mm I felt more comfortable walking around as that combination doesn't look intimidating at all. Kinda a wolf in sheeps clothing.

The Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 worked well for cheerleading as for the most part us parents got to get up close to the stage while our kids performed.

This is an old post, but I still see click-thru's to my Flickr account from it, so I thought I'd add a bit to it.

Since I originally posted this question, I've actually eventually gotten all the equipment that I was thinking about in the original post and have had a chance to play with them all.

Here's my personal findings with all the pieces. All in IMHO. But based on using all this stuff.

Nikon D5100 + Tamron 28-75mm f2.8
Originally, right after posting this question and getting feedback, I decided to stick with a smaller budget, rather than get the D7000 at that point in time, I got the D5100 and got the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lens. Looking back at all the keepers I got with this combination, I think it was the right move for me at the time. And this was pushing the camera to iso3200 (high iso) in less than ideal light, chasing my daughter throughout her gymnastics and cheerleading meets. What I think made it possible was not just how great the Nikon D5100 is, but that I took the advice and got the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 to get a better lens on the camera and more light to the sensor. Since then, I've added a SB600 flash to my gear, so got the want to fire it off camera, and some faster (f1.8 & f1.4 lenses) so slowly after the 2 years I've had the D5100, I'm just starting to feel the want for the extra features of a more advanced model.

Nikon D90 + Tamron 28-105 f2.8 + Nikon 80-200 f2.8 (Push Pull version.)
Since the above posts . . . I happened across an old Nikon 80-200 f2.8 (push pull) version lens. It was pretty much beat up, but still works. It doesn't have a focus motor, so I didn't use it with my D5100. Instead, I found a D90 for a good price and started using it and my old Tamron 28-105 f2.8 with the D90. As nice as the D90 is, at iso3200 in less than idea light, it is outperformed by my D5100. But it opened the opportunity to do off-camera flash wirelessly with iTTL. But, it got me thinking that I should eventually replace the D90 with at least a D7000, since more than half the time I use these cameras, I'm at iso3200.

Nikon D7000 + Tamron 28-105 f2.8 / Tamron 28-75 f2.8 + Nikon 80-200 f2.8
Last week, I came across a Black Friday deal for a D7000 that I couldn't walk away from. The high iso performance of the D7000 is about the same as the D5100 (which I was always under the impression that they shared a similiar, if not the same, sensor). Performance wise the D7000 is a bit more robust with 6fps versus the D5100 4fps, but about the same amount of pictures before the buffer gets filled.

I tried my old Tamron 28-105 f2.8 on the D7000 and then right after it the Tamron 28-75 f2.8. The difference is as clear as day, especially in less than idea light. The newer Tamron 28-75 f2.8 with its built-in focus motor can focus soooo much faster than the older Tamron 28-105 f2.8 that relies on the focus motor of the camera body. And the newer lens is a lot more sharp. Some might point out that if stopped down the Tamron 28-105 f2.8 might still be a good performer, but since I'm trying to shoot in less than idea light and not allowed to use flash, I am usually stuck at f2.8 with my lenses when shooting gymnastics. Cheerleading with stage lighting I'd be at f4.

The real treat was when I got the Nikon 80-200 f2.8 on the D7000. It focused so well that that lens came alive on that body. I'll probably replace the Nikon 80-200 f2.8 down the road, but its not really a priority for me right now. It's a little slower to focus. And a little fiddly selecting the focus range with its clunky (but cool) way to limit focus range. But . . . it's actually fast enough for me to use at gymnastics. Especially following just one subject. And definitely fast enough for the odd portrait.

Nikon D7100 or D610?
I thought about getting the D7100, but the deal on the D7000 was just too good. And I've been thinking that my next camera body would be a FF like a D610 or something. The D610 for what I'm doing looks like it makes a lot of sense. I shoot at high iso in less than ideal light and not allowed to use flash. The D610 seems to have better high iso performance than any DX body. So I could share the extra high iso performance and split it between better IQ and increasing the shutter speed to help reduce the motion blur of the gymnasts hands and feet. That, and it would make my Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 a bit wider at the wide end, so I could get the gymnast shots when they come right up to the edge of the floor, but still have a respectable DX equivalent crop when the gymnast crosses to the back of the floor. But I just didn't have the budget for the D610 this year. Although next year I think its doable. Now, if I wasn't thinking of FF next year, then I would have totally gone with the D7100 and be done with it. <grin>

Next Steps
I think my next steps, besides getting a D610, is to probably replace my old Tamron 28-105 f2.8 with another Tamron 28-75 f2.8 so that both me and my wife can shoot that lens. Her on the D5100 and me on the D7000. Get a couple more external Nikon flashes and more light modifiers. Maybe explore a couple more lenses.

__________________
Take care & Happy Shooting!

NOTE: I'm trying to capture the picture in my head! Not the one my camera sees!

I still get click-thru's from this post, especially just before gymnastics competition season, so I thought I'd update it.

Since the last post, I've gotten a Nikon D750 and added another Nikon flash unit, so now I'm up to 2 flash units. [An SB-800 and an SB-600.]

I was originally looking at the Nikon D7100 as an update to my D7000, but was leery of the buffer size. But I was also looking at the D610 because of the potential of better high iso / low light performance. Partly for gymnastics, but also for paid work that my wife and I are starting to see. And then the D750 came out with the 51-point AF system. And then the D7200 came out with the bigger buffer! So I was really torn!

I was really humming and hawing about the whole thing. And then Nikon came along this Spring and had a sale, so I had to jump down off the fence and make a decision. So I went with the Nikon D750. And I have to say that I have really been pleased with it.

But if my wife and I weren't interested in the D750 for paid work, I would have probably gone with the D7200. I was pleased with the high iso / low light performance of my D5100. But wished I could get that performance in a D7x00 series body, with a sufficient buffer. And from the looks of it, the D7200 is that camera.

Nikon D750
I've had the D750 for a few months now and I have been really impressed with it. From what I've seen, it does have 1-stop (or more) of better high iso / low light performance over my D5100. Shots at iso6400 seem as good as, if not better than, shots at iso3200 on my D5100.

And it has been playing nicely with my Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 and Nikon 50mm f1.8 AF-D. But my Nikon 80-200mm f2.8 (push pull), which is in really bad shape, needs to be stopped down 2/3 of a stop. But I am finding for portrait shots, I need to be at f4 - f8 anyway, so that is no biggy for me right now.

As for gymnastics, if you can get close to the action, it works out really well. But if you have to shoot from far away, like I do from the stands, its a bit of a stretch, and perhaps shooting a D7200 with FX lenses makes more sense then. (Which is why I'm still looking at that D7200 to upgrade my D7000.)

Here are a few shots from one of our 1st portrait session with the D750 . . .

Tamron 28-105mm f2.8 versus Tamron 28-75mm f2.8
I still have the Tamron 28-105mm f2.8. I haven't gotten around to selling it yet. I tried it on the D750, but the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 really does render a better picture.

Next Steps
1. I guess I still haven't sold my Tamron 28-105mm f2.8 to get another Tamron 28-75mm f2.8, so I might still do that.

2. I've been getting back into external off camera flash, so I guess I'll get some more light modifiers to experiment with. And probably one more SB-800.

3. Probably at some point in time I'll look at some sort of 85mm f1.8 lens.

4. And not for a while, but eventually I'll probably update my D7000 to a D7200.

5. And I've started looking at mono lights.

Sidenote: Fast SD Cards
If you are shooting and finding the buffer is not big enough, you might be able to take the edge off by putting in faster SD Cards. That way, when the buffer does fill up, the SD Card is able to empty the buffer quicker, so you can get back to shooting quicker. Someone pointed me to the Sandisk Extreme Pro SD Cards. It was on sale one day so I grabbed one to try it out, and it was the difference between night and day. For my D7000, I thought the buffer was sufficient (shooting JPG) for floor on gymnastics, but sometimes when shooting kids in RAW, I would max out the buffer, and then miss shots as I waited for the buffer to empty. When I put the Sandisk Extreme Pro SD Card into the D7000 and shot, it felt like a different camera. Even if I maxed out the buffer, the camera was ready to shoot a lot sooner. So, I am planning to pick up some 64 GB Sandisk Extreme Pro SD Cards for my D750 with its 24 MP sensor.

__________________
Take care & Happy Shooting!

NOTE: I'm trying to capture the picture in my head! Not the one my camera sees!